Kubrick helped in moon landing hoax? - what a read!

[Peachtree Pam]

Well, I'm sorry you can't read it Sweejak, maybe he will re-post it later.<br><br>I actually met an astronaut in 1988, David Scott, who was the 7th man on the moon. He was the surprise speaker at a conference I organised of computer distributors.<br><br>After his speech we had a question and answer period, and I asked him what he thought of UFOs.<br><br>He became very angry and said "There was no such thing as UFOs." I said, Well, we have put men on the moon, I don't see why other beings can't come to our planet to explore."<br><br>He repeated, There is NO SUCH THING AS UFOs!" and then turned to someone else.<br><br>He had brought some moon rocks with him, which we looked at. Grey, powdery rocks.<br><br>So I didn't know what to make of his utterly dogmatic reaction. <p></p><i></i>

[Sweejak]

I did read it in a hop/ scan style. I had blown off the theory when I looked into the analysis of the shadows. I'm currently undecided and would like to see what the author comes up with next because it was logical and made sense, particularly the lack of time delay in the voice communication. I'd have to review tapes though, but if memory serves it seems that there was no delay. How to explain that?<br>Here is a debunking site:<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/">www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/space/solarsystem/earth/apolloevidence.shtml">www.bbc.co.uk/science/spa...ence.shtml</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>

[Dirk]

Hello from Germany,<br>>Today, they're struggling to get a manned vehicle up in to orbit and back again without it blowing up in their faces.<<br><br>There is a simple explanation: Today, the analog technology from 40 years ago isn't available anymore, while the digital technology still isn't.<br><br>Dirk <p></p><i></i>

[Pants Elk]

Not having read the article, because it's been withdrawn for factual innacuracies, I have this to add to the "staged moon landing" theory.<br><br>If the moon landing was a staged event, made and directed by film business professionals, what we'd see is something like films of the day looked like. Not so much in terms of the technological design, but it the look of the medium itself. The pictures would look like movie stills. They don't. One of the most fantastic things about the moon landings for me (who followed them avidly at the time, with a perhaps sharper eye than I have now) was the entirely new visual universe these images represented. Not even Kubrick and Trumbull themselves could have come up with that quality, that light, that LOOK. Sometimes, Rigorous Intuition works for the official account. My own RI tells me that the moon landings were not staged simply because - it looks absolutely real. In a way no movie ever has, the great 2001 included.<br><br>(My same RI antenna also tells me JFK was shot from the front, and that too is based purely on what I see). <p></p><i></i>

[Qutb]

I agree, Elk. They did walk on the moon. Lucky bastards. <p><!--EZCODE FONT START--><span style="color:black;font-family:century gothic;font-size:x-small;"><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Qutb means "axis," "pole," "the center," which contains the periphery or is present in it. The qutb is a spiritual being, or function, which can reside in a human being or several human beings or a moment. It is the elusive mystery of how the divine gets delegated into the manifest world and obviously cannot be defined.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--></span><!--EZCODE FONT END--><br><br></p><i></i>

[MinM]

http://www.sonyclassics.com/moon/trailer.html