Moon landing hoax - vacuum, radiation, Hollywood and the Nazis

[lighthouse]

"I wouldn't know how the sky would look during the moon day without an atmosphere"

= My God, it's full of stars!

[lighthouse]

I posted a thread for this video in the "latest videos" forum. but thought I should here too.

This is my fave video on the theory of conspiracy regards the 6 moon landings.

It is cheaply made in places. The presenter seems to be sitting on a home made cardboard superimposed set. And you want it all to be a joke. But you start to realise or at least think that perhaps most, but not all, of these discoveries show that Houston may have had a big problem getting to the moon!

They have the space projects manger who made the moon film cameras Hasselblad on the show and even he seems confused regards the lighting of the photos. There are some fun characters on this show also.

This is the best quality upload I could find. Enjoy and please tell me what you think.

part 1.


part 2

[Firestarter]

This is my fave video on the theory of conspiracy regards the 6 moon landings.

I quickly had my doubts because David Percy seems to be the most important source for the documentary.
I took a quick look, the video was better than I expected...

One of the notorious disinformation agents on the moon landings is TV producer David Percy (90% truth - 10% blatant lies); a long-time associate of the Royal Photographic Society: http://www.aulis.com/david-percy.htm


The Royal Photographic Society of Great Britain (RPS) is one of the world's oldest photographic societies. It was founded in 1853 and in 1854 received Royal patronage from Queen Victoria and Prince Albert: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Pho ... ic_Society

Duchess of Cambridge, Kate Middleton, is a lifetime honorary member of the RPS: https://www.independent.ie/style/celebr ... 37814.html

[lighthouse]

Hey Firestarter what do you think of the two black and white photos on the previous page (4)? I think they are a satellite telescope looking at one of the landing sites on the surface of the moon.

[lighthouse]

Regards the two recent photos of the moon surface that show man made tracks and equipment on the moon.

a.Neil and buzz really went to the moon and they are real photos of the area they landed on.

b. The new photos are faked. Photo shopped.

c. The photos are real but it was not Buzz and Neil on the first mission as they went around the Earth to ensure they were kept safe. Other men went to the moon to collect rocks and so forth.

d. Recently, they sent a probe up with robots to make the area look like men went to the moon including identical robot space buggy, flag, and all the things required to leave the area looking just as it should and then took a photo from a satellite telescope?

e. Something else?

[Facts are Facts Ned]

1965 scientist claims the moon is plasma

[Boadicea]

1965 scientist claims the moon is plasma

From a Time When 'NEWS' was More than a Nano-Second Sound-byte of Bullshit for the Attention Spans of Gnats!
Whether the Content Proves Verifiable shall Require More Sleuthing
Interesting Find Ned
I was Six and hadn't Arrived on Sunny Shores of OZ yet.


Professor R Foster sounds to have an Israeli Accent to my Ears.
Not Reading 'Mossad' into that, Just making an Observation.

Found this Thread Ned, You May have Seen it...
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=17369.0

"How did you verify that it was Roy Foster, Prof at Dundee and the other references? I've found similar references and some volumes a Roy Foster authored regarding molecular study that perhaps match his field and are dated from the early 70's. However, I can't find anything that "verifies" a connection.

Also, I watched the full 9:30 version of the interview, he doesn't really say much over the course of it. Kind of just alludes to things. I would have expected a few bits of evidence out of the longer version, but there's really no there there.

However, an interesting mystery."


"Not explicitly, but by way of inference, there are no other R. Fosters who are professors dealing in any other field, and what are the chances there are professors who share the same name and have a focus on some form of Chemistry. Everything i found on R. Foster suggest he worked at Dundee University, member of RSE, worked with Prof Brimacombe, was head of the Chem department, and his name comes up frequently in the backdrop of the lunar expeditions.

The interview was most likely heald as a result of the 1965 NASA Summer conference on lunar expeditions, whether he was at the conference or not i dont know. But all this information gathered can be simply verified by the University of Dundees records, that is unless they have photo evidence of him or better yet have something very specific related to his statement about the moon not being solid.

If they cant ascribe the name to the face, or provide relevant papers. The only route would be to find someone who can identify him, maybe family, former students etc. But i am totally certain it is him, and if i were a betting man i'd put all my money on it."


"Are you sure about this reference: he is the only R. Foster from Mitchel and Longman 1983 directory "Materials Research Centres: A World Directory of Organizations and Programmes in Materials Science" as the head of the Chemistry department at Dundee alongside Professor J. S Brimacombe."?

As the only references I find with a Foster and J. S Brimacombe is regarding authors listed as: John S. Brimacombe, Allan Mark Bloomfield Foster

Often referenced as J.S. Brimacombe & A.B. Foster. And in a few instances I've seen: Authors: "J. S. Brimacombe, A. B. Foster, R. Hems, J. H. Westwood, and L. D. Hall"

Notice how an 'R' appears after 'Foster'. It's the 'R' from the author "R. Hems", not from Foster.

So I believe your J.S. Brimacombe/R. Foster connection is incorrect.

As for, "...and his name comes up frequently in the backdrop of the lunar expeditions." I can find no relevant references on this. Do you have any specifics?"


"I would be happy to clarify, the books name is verbatim "Materials Research Centres: A World Directory of Organizations and Programmes in Materials Science" authored by "Eric Mitchell, Elizabeth Lines
Longman, 1983" there are 654 pages, and you will find both Brimacombe and R. Foster on page 527 under heading Chemistry Department, in section 644. Just so we are on the same page here is the link to the book, you can use the Search bar to look for kew words inside the book: https://books.google.co.ke/books?id=y5J ... ster"+1983

As for what I meant by his name coming up in the backdrop of the lunar expeditions, I meant that only one person with special interest in chemistry comes up in the references dating to that era of lunar exploration 1969-1972 (as im only getting references from one R. Foster from 1971-1972 with an interest in Chemistry."
Columbo

[Firestarter]

Whether the Content Proves Verifiable shall Require More Sleuthing
Interesting Find Ned

At first I thought, this could be interesting... if it's true.
But then I thought, this "professor" is a bullshit artist.

The good "professor" makes some general remarks of the level:
- I made all sorts of prediction in 1954 that in the last years have proven to be correct.
- Over the last years, all sorts of evidence have confirmed that the moon is "a plasma".

The main problem here is with the interviewer should have asked for specific information. Without this the "professor" can make his wild claims without even having to explain himself.
I'm not saying that if the good "professor" can claim correct predictions made 11 years ago this would make him credible, but the interviewer should have asked. The interviewer does ask, but the "professor" responds with some general remarks that all science since Aristoteles is wrong.
Likewise the interviewer should have asked the "professor" which evidence confirms his wild claims.

To add injury to insult the "professor" says something of the primary school level, "if" it is proven that the moon is "a plasma", ALL laws of physics have to be reinvestigated. A "professor" wouldn't make such a big claim, because this would be obvious to any scientist.
Other than that in this statement, the professor admits that he has no evidence at all, but is waiting for (real) scientists to prove...

As the "professor" doesn't talk like an astronomer, I don't think he is, so this would make it irrelevant if he is a "professor" in some field that has nothing to do with astronomy.


.

Found this Thread Ned, You May have Seen it...
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=17369.0

I guess you, like me, did a short internet search for more information on this "professor Foster". The thread you pasted from a flat earth forum was probably the best I found.
Not finding any information on this "professor Foster", makes it doubtful that he is a "professor" at all...

[Firestarter]

Wires, lost technology and more NASA BS...

[Ziggy_Sawdust]

Nobody has been to the moon.....EVER.
Nor will they.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/nGoJEOaa5jQ