Hi folks, long time lurker first time poster. I found the entire movie "What Happened on the Moon" available on Google Video and gave it a watch. After about 45 minutes I got sick of it and gave up. I mentioned this on the Apollo Hoax forum and somebody told me to write a review for it on amazon since the only existing review was unabashadly positive. So I did. I didn't want to do the usual thing of debunking the video point by point but I did feel that certain things warranted comment. Here it is in full for you guys to enjoy/pick out any errors or argue over:

"This film is awful. I could only stomach the first 45 minutes of this 2 hour epic. The same information is available in much greater detail on the internet for free, and you get the availability of hearing both sides of the issue.

Not only is the film boring and ridiculously cheesy, but the arguments are weak. At one point, David Percy shows a video from Apollo 16 showing the jump salute. His argument is that a flap hanging loose from the PLSS backpack is visible in the still photos of the event but not in the video. It would be a good argument if the flap wasn't plainly visible in the video. They show the video multiple times and the flap is clearly flopping around during the jump. If you didn't catch it the first time, they give you another chance.

At another point, they reference the "anomalous" shadow directions in the lunar photographs by showing a photograph of a row of trees and their "correctly aligned" shadows. Big honking white lines are drawn on top of the picture to show the shadow angle. Too bad one of the trees directly to the right of the big honking line has a shadow that appears horizontal in comparison to the line and the rest of the shadows. They used a picture showing diverging shadow angles to try and prove that shadow angles do not diverge under a single light source.

Finally (at least to the point that I could handle watching), they show the famous photo of Buzz Aldrin standing next to the leg of the LM. They claim that the center fiducial is significantly below the center of the frame. They also claim that they are using high quality duplicates from the original master prints. They are as bold as to say that the photo must have been manipulated in nefarious ways. They are correct. The photo has been manipulated but it wasn't by NASA. People epxerienced with the Apollo record know that the top of Buzz's PLSS backpack is cut off by the top of the frame in that famous shot, but in their copy they place the top of the frame well above the backpack and to compensate they cut off a similar amount at the bottom to keep the dimensions correct. Percy and his crew either deliberately recropped the photograph themselves or are lying about their source of the photo.

When the makers of this film aren't unintentionally showing us the mistakes in their arguments they are creating the anomalies themselves. They are hacks and this film is the proof."

Afterwards I had a change of heart and watched the rest of the video. No longer content with my review I added some discussion board topics. I won't quote them here but they are freely available to look at on the site.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...v=glance&n=130

Could you guys read the review and discussion board topics and give me some feedback? I want to make sure all information I present is as correct as possible.

have you heard of bart sibril the astronaut ambusher

Thanks for the links and reviews, RB...Having laughed myself sick watching some moonhoax garbage on Channel 4 some years' back, I'll not be purchasing such rubbish anyway...A good warning to potential buyers non-the-less...

PS: the 'arguments' don't seem to have changed much over the years. More a case of 'recycling' methinks?

__________________
Kind regards

Pete Tattum

The plural of anecdote isn't data!

Welcome to the board. Yes, most of the regulars here are quite familiar with Bart Sibrel and the other well-known HBs, and have dissected their arguments, techniques, and motivations at some length. Try searching this forum for Sibrel, Collier, Kaysing, Percy, White, for some.

BTW, regarding some of your other posts - profanity and ad hominem attacks are forbidden by this board's terms of service.

I really can't believe that seemingly intelligent human beings really believe that we went to the moon, the Van Allen belt would make that an impossibility in itself.

There is so much evidence out there that debunks that silly theory that its obvious that we never went near the moon.

Or do you all also think that our Government would never tell us a lie?

Incorrect. Intelligent people do intelligent research. See here:

http://www.clavius.org/envrad.html

Incorrect. There are many (often repeated) claims, but they are based on misunderstanding of the underlying science and technology - like the one you just repeated.

Do you think that the U.S. government always lies?

In any event, it's irrelevant to the evidence, including many lunar rock samples,

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

That link on the radiation tells me nothing. Nasa can barely get a shuttle into low earth orbit without mishap and you want me to believe that they went to the moon, landed and took off, reestablished docking with the orbiter and thrusted back to earth, peeeelllleeeeaaase. Your 10 dollar calculator has more computer power than they had on the Apollo missions.

And yes, I do believe that the Government lies about 90 percent of the time to its people, you need to do the research and pull your head out of the sand

Anyhow, I can see what level of intelligence I'm dealing with here, Clavius website for debunking the debunkers, give me a break, there is absolutely no REAL evidence that Nasa ever went to the moon, everything that they did was done in a studio or in area 51, anybody can see that after looking at the real evidence provided to us by nasa, I can see that the gentlemen frequenting this forum are shills for the powers that be.

We are living in interesting times. But believe me, they would never attempt another moon landing hoax because people now are too saavy and would immediately see through their lies.

You guys just keep dreaming, crack another beer and tune into to the latest star trek episode

Then you either didn't read it, didn't understand it, or ignored it. Let's reverse this: Please show the evidence that astronauts, given their trajectory, would die due to radiation exposure.

Close to 120 flights now. Then there is the space station, space probes across the solar system, probes heading out of the solar system, rovers on Mars . . .

"I don't believe it, so there!"

Another tired argument, and one I find particularly ridiculous. I know computers and I've worked with computers roughly comparable with the AGC. We still use computers comparable to the AGC in embedded applications, and it was plenty good enough for what was needed.

Ah, there we go: "The government always lies so it must have been a lie!"

Well, you certainly are fitting the profile of a typical moon hoax believer: Same tired arguments, doesn't understand the science or technology, and assumes the government is just one big conspiracy.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Oh, I forgot that one: "If you disagree with me, you must be a government disinformation agent!"

You are supporting my OCTT.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

The fact that I do understand the "science and technology" is exactly why I don't buy the official conspiracy theory put forth by nasa and nuts like you.

Its been exposed already, give it up, watch "Dark Side of the Moon" with Kubricks wife, Dick Cheney and the rest of the hoaxers. Sheessh, why do you guys continue to beat a dead horse.

Thousands of questions, everything exposed in half a dozen documentaries, no answers, just more cover ups.

Then show the evidence that astronauts, given their trajectory, would die due to radiation exposure.

"Dark Side of the Moon" was a HOAX. See here, for example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Si...documentary%29

It is finally revealed that this is a mockumentary as the end credits roll over a montage of blooper reels, with the main participants laughing over the absurdity of their lines or questioning if particular ones would give the joke away too soon. Besides being a comedic documentary, it is also an exercise in Jean Baudrillard's theories of hyperreality.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Ok guys, its been fun, I think I'll continue my search for "intelligent" life on earth, I can see why this site is called bad astronomy, its all been torn to pieces by much more "intelligent" life forms than myself. Nuff said

Clavius government coverup websites, what a pile of dodo, no stars? no dust? no high jumps? no reflector left behind to prove that they were there, now that would have been hard to do, no wonder!

Keep dreaming

Dark side hoax or not, I'm a photographer and the lighting was done in a studio, they should have not protrayed it as done on the moon, If they didn't lie about that, maybe we'd be more inclined to believe the rest of the story

In other words, your best piece of evidence was proven to be a joke and now you're taking your toys and going home. Classic. Why don't you come back when you really understand the science. For example, by claiming there should be stars in the pictures you show you know nothing about photography or exposure times.

__________________
"Eternal vigilance is the price of supremacy"
------------Mark Twain

"Women are like Voltron. The more you can hook up, the better it gets."

The fact that I do understand the "science and technology" is exactly why I don't buy the official conspiracy theory put forth by nasa and nuts like you.

OK, so if Gemini 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, Soyuz 3, 4, Apollo 9 and 10 could all perform orbital rendezvous, why couldn't Apollo 11?

Its been exposed already, give it up, watch "Dark Side of the Moon" with Kubricks wife, Dick Cheney and the rest of the hoaxers. Sheessh, why do you guys continue to beat a dead horse.

Pwned! If you'd watched "Dark Side of the Moon" to the end you would have seen that the whole movie was a parody to yank the chains of gullible conspiracy fans - and you fell for it, hook line & sinker!

__________________
"Transport of the mails, transport of the human voice, transport of flickering pictures - in this century, as in others, our highest accomplishments still have the single aim of bringing men together." St. Exupery

If any of you reading this can think outside the box, check out these documentaries, and even if they hurt your sensibilities, a lot of good points are made:

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon
EVIDENCE Apollo Moon Landing is a Hoax!

and the one that the gentleman at the top of the page really likes:
What happened on the Moon

Too much evidence, not enough proof, good try Van Rijn, say hi to your buddies at Nasa or the Cia or whatever numbered agency you work for.

Yawn. Same old tired fallback. Losing the argument so those that disagree with you must be paid to post that way. Ever consider the fact that many that post here are engineers actually involved in the manufacture and operation of various satellites and spacecraft?

Every single one of your "documentaries" use circular logic, half truths, and outright lies to try to make their points. That is not a single piece of "evidence" for a moon hoax that has not been refuted dozens of times. If you actually researched both sides you might realize that. The funny thing is that many here have probably seen more hoax "evidence" than you have because they have taken the time to research both sides and analyze what exactly is being said. You on the other hand just swallow what the hoax theorists have to say because it fits your predefined conclusions.

__________________
"Eternal vigilance is the price of supremacy"
------------Mark Twain

"Women are like Voltron. The more you can hook up, the better it gets."

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon
EVIDENCE Apollo Moon Landing is a Hoax!

Actually, that one is evidence that Bart Sibrel is a liar and a con-man. Here is one of many good disections of that particular comedy of errors. Note that there is no "belief" called for; simply analysis of the relevant data.

__________________
"Transport of the mails, transport of the human voice, transport of flickering pictures - in this century, as in others, our highest accomplishments still have the single aim of bringing men together." St. Exupery

Yes yawn is right, you religious zealots will always believe whatever the faith demands. I have looked at the mainstream explanations for the questions asked by the moonlanding hoax debunkers, sounds bad "debunkers" , kinda conspiracy theorist like doesn't it, no proof boys, lots of taxpayer dollars and no proof, just like some of the things going on today.