Buzz Aldrin: "It Didn't Happen"

[PelliX]

Cool, thanks. So let me play devil's advocate for a sec here....

There was not any great quantity of exotic metals found. The surface is the same as when the moon broke off from earth after earth formed (whereas earth's surface and interior have continued to evolve from the action of the core and various levels). In the foreseeable future no one will get rich mining the moon for the materials found on the surface. But, there may be more valuable metals below the surface.

So someone has some rocks that you can hardly differentiate from other rocks here on earth. He tells you it's from the moon. He could be pulling your leg and have a plain old terrestrian rock. If you start to apply Occam's razor here....

Also, if I recall correctly, NASA determined that the moon was - if not 'hollow' - certainly less dense towards the centre. Didn't they disgard something like an engine or spent tank above the lunar surface a long time ago?

 

[Lo-Tek]

Cool, thanks. So let me play devil's advocate for a sec here....



So someone has some rocks that you can hardly differentiate from other rocks here on earth. He tells you it's from the moon. He could be pulling your leg and have a plain old terrestrian rock. If you start to apply Occam's razor here....

Also, if I recall correctly, NASA determined that the moon was - if not 'hollow' - certainly less dense towards the centre. Didn't they disgard something like an engine or spent tank above the lunar surface a long time ago?

No idea what was left but a recent story was the crash of a believed to be Chinese made rocket into the dark side. An impact that left an odd double crater. The object was first identified by an "amateur" astronomer.
space trash hits moon

As for the density it seems NASA says the moon is densest at the metallic core-
moon density

 

[Dogs of Doom]

the moon broke off from earth after earth formed (whereas earth's surface and interior have continued to evolve from the action of the core and various levels).

so, if the moon broke off of the global earth:

1. how is it, that the moon is a sphere (globe) in an almost perfect sense?
2. where's the missing globe from the earth's almost perfect sphere?



I do not see any indication of a perfect global displacement from our near perfect globe...

do you believe in spinoff theory, or collision?

if collision, then how are either planet earth, or the moon ball shaped? If something the size of Mars collided w/ earth & created the moon, by breakoff, where are all the other fragments, of lesser (or greater) size? & still, how does the earth &/or moon then keep it's girlish figure?

For instance, you have a marble. The marble is spherical. You smash it w/ a hammer & you have 2 substantial pieces. Aren't there a bunch more fragments?

How many of them are perfect spheres after the collision w/ the hammer? 1 boulder & 1 marble?

If there was a 2nd planet, what happened to the 2nd planet & all it's fragments?

that seems too remarkable to have happened in any event.

talk about conspiracy theories.

 

[crossroadsnyc]

so, if the moon broke off of the global earth:

1. how is it, that the moon is a sphere (globe) in an almost perfect sense?
2. where's the missing globe from the earth's almost perfect sphere?

View attachment 127804

I do not see any indication of a perfect global displacement from our near perfect globe...

do you believe in spinoff theory, or collision?

if collision, then how are either planet earth, or the moon ball shaped? If something the size of Mars collided w/ earth & created the moon, by breakoff, where are all the other fragments, of lesser (or greater) size? & still, how does the earth &/or moon then keep it's girlish figure?

For instance, you have a marble. The marble is spherical. You smash it w/ a hammer & you have 2 substantial pieces. Aren't there a bunch more fragments?

How many of them are perfect spheres after the collision w/ the hammer? 1 boulder & 1 marble?

If there was a 2nd planet, what happened to the 2nd planet & all it's fragments?

that seems too remarkable to have happened in any event.

talk about conspiracy theories.

He's right, it's just that his explanation is a bit misleading ... here's what happened:

Once upon a time, earth actually had 3 globes, and they were stacked together a lot like a snowman. During the course of space exploration, a highly advanced civilization from the Andromeda Galaxy stumbled upon this anomaly, and upon suspecting it might be a military instillation from another civilization with whom they had been at war for millions of years, they made the decision to destroy it. Well, in doing so, they realized that not only was it not a military base, but they had inadvertently helped shape the growth of the Milky Way Galaxy, as the three globes of our original earth are now Earth (bottom globe on snowman), Mars (middle globe on snowman), and our Moon (snowman's head). There's more, of course, but that should set you on the right path of discovery.

 

[PelliX]

so, if the moon broke off of the global earth:

1. how is it, that the moon is a sphere (globe) in an almost perfect sense?
2. where's the missing globe from the earth's almost perfect sphere?

View attachment 127804

I do not see any indication of a perfect global displacement from our near perfect globe...

do you believe in spinoff theory, or collision?

if collision, then how are either planet earth, or the moon ball shaped? If something the size of Mars collided w/ earth & created the moon, by breakoff, where are all the other fragments, of lesser (or greater) size? & still, how does the earth &/or moon then keep it's girlish figure?

For instance, you have a marble. The marble is spherical. You smash it w/ a hammer & you have 2 substantial pieces. Aren't there a bunch more fragments?

How many of them are perfect spheres after the collision w/ the hammer? 1 boulder & 1 marble?

If there was a 2nd planet, what happened to the 2nd planet & all it's fragments?

that seems too remarkable to have happened in any event.

talk about conspiracy theories.

I'm guessing it would have to be in a molten state for that to work.

 

[Matthews Guitars]

Actually it was caught on video. (No, it's a computer simulation.)

 

[Lo-Tek]

so, if the moon broke off of the global earth:

1. how is it, that the moon is a sphere (globe) in an almost perfect sense?
2. where's the missing globe from the earth's almost perfect sphere?

View attachment 127804

I do not see any indication of a perfect global displacement from our near perfect globe...

do you believe in spinoff theory, or collision?

if collision, then how are either planet earth, or the moon ball shaped? If something the size of Mars collided w/ earth & created the moon, by breakoff, where are all the other fragments, of lesser (or greater) size? & still, how does the earth &/or moon then keep it's girlish figure?

For instance, you have a marble. The marble is spherical. You smash it w/ a hammer & you have 2 substantial pieces. Aren't there a bunch more fragments?

How many of them are perfect spheres after the collision w/ the hammer? 1 boulder & 1 marble?

If there was a 2nd planet, what happened to the 2nd planet & all it's fragments?

that seems too remarkable to have happened in any event.

talk about conspiracy theories.

There are only theories about how the moon formed. If it was caused by collision gravity would over millennia pull matter into a sphere.
Again- that's a theory not a fact (ie. not the same as the Earth is round!)

 

[DBi5]

Has anyone EVER looked through a telescope at what was left on the surface of the moon after the landing?
If you have, you KNOW that it happened!
Nuff said!

There are no telescopes powerful enough to do that.

There are five Retroreflectors on the moon to measure the distance from earth using lunar laser ranging (Locations and coordinates are freely available online).

The moon is drifting away at a rate of around an inch and a half per year with the obvious consequences for our planet (flat or otherwise).

 

[ELS]

So, was Buzz Aldrin trolling, or have decades of lies become too much to bare for his conscience? 🤔

Well it's a fact that much of the footage seen on TV was actually faked. make that what you will.

 

[tallcoolone]

Well it's a fact that much of the footage seen on TV was actually faked. make that what you will.

I didn’t know this was a fact but I am intrigued. Can you elaborate?

 

[tallcoolone]

There are no telescopes powerful enough to do that.

But…

Has anyone EVER looked through a telescope at what was left on the surface of the moon after the landing?
If you have, you KNOW that it happened!
Nuff said!

Where did you find your telescope?

 

[Lo-Tek]

But…

Where did you find your telescope?

He must be confused because there are pictures out taken by our satellite orbiting the moon.
Of course, the photos would be fakes according to conspiracists.

 

[Beryllium-9]

Lie me to the moon..

 

[tallcoolone]

He must be confused

I guess, seemed so confident I figured it was a fact. I guess there is something to be said for thinking critically after all

 

[circles]

He must be confused because there are pictures out taken by our satellite orbiting the moon.
Of course, the photos would be fakes according to conspiracists.

Fake! Why would there be words and arrows on the moon? Wake up sheeple!

 

[ELS]

I didn’t know this was a fact but I am intrigued. Can you elaborate?

Much of the footage shown on TV was actually filmed on a set, with cables pulling the astronauts up to simulate the reduced gravity. (in some of the videos the cables can even be seen)
It's not uncommon to see fake footage used on TV, maybe for video quality reasons or something else.

I don't really buy the moon landing conspiracy but It's clear that there's a lot that we don't know about it.

 

[dro]

I watched the moon landing on TV when I was a kid. TV was the closest thing we had to the internet back then.
Today, people believe everything they see on the internet.
I'm much more concerned about what we are being lied to about, today.
Rather than what we may or may not have been lied to, shortly after the Prez. was killed on national TV, by a lone shooter.
But that's a whole nother can of worms.

 

[Matthews Guitars]

Ah, the single bullet theory.

We are expected to believe that THIS specific once-fired bullet...

went through two people, killing one...via this path...

and we're not supposed to question it?


Not saying I believe the Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories, but am saying I don't necessarily completely believe the official story, either.

Funny that such a well documented event is so far from completely settled beyond doubt. Funny that the declassification of the secret report of it keeps getting delayed...and probably will until everyone involved is safely dead and finally past any threat of receiving justice before the law.

 

[PelliX]

Much of the footage shown on TV was actually filmed on a set, with cables pulling the astronauts up to simulate the reduced gravity. (in some of the videos the cables can even be seen)
It's not uncommon to see fake footage used on TV, maybe for video quality reasons or something else.

I don't really buy the moon landing conspiracy but It's clear that there's a lot that we don't know about it.

See, that's the 'normal' way of approaching topics if you ask me. Expect to have some BS along with some truth served. It's your job to decipher which is which. Of course a lot of the material is PR stuff. That doesn't mean *none* of it happened.

Not saying I believe the Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories, but am saying I don't necessarily completely believe the official story, either.

And there you hit it on the head. The 'conspiracy theory' here is that Oswald did it all single-handedly with the gun outlined. No way. The truth is probably more like there being at least two shooters, and I'm not sure Oswald was actually even one of them. So another combination of some truth in the official narrative (Kennedy did indeed get shot) and some BS (it was all Oswald).

Today, people believe everything they see on the internet.
I'm much more concerned about what we are being lied to about, today.
Rather than what we may or may not have been lied to, shortly after the Prez. was killed on national TV, by a lone shooter.
But that's a whole nother can of worms.

Well, here's an alternative view on that; people used to believe whatever was on TV, which is a single directed narrative in most cases. Now people can at least read the most crazy convoluted explanations on the Internet *as well*. I'd prefer 10 wildly different theories to 'triangulate' by than a single version with some 'official' stamp.

 

[Matthews Guitars]

Advancing computer technology is making it easier to create fakes that will convince the layman, and, yes, even those who are at a higher level of expertise in evaluating evidence. And it's going to get worse.
The day is coming where if you don't witness it happening live in front of your face, you won't ever be sure that what you are seeing is real.