I'm no rocket scientist and don't know the physics behind it all - so I'm not ruling that out as plausible - but what would be the reason for the astronauts picking up and carrying the rover?

Same here...the only thing I can think of would be that maybe they could walk faster carrying it than the rover could roll carrying them?

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh ...

Perhaps to reach a place it couldn't traverse, like over rocks, or maybe it was quicker to turn it around that way when heading back, or maybe just to set up a nice shot (no joke, why not).

What would be reason to lift it into position on a movie set, rather than just push it or drive it?

Good points, too.

Can't believe I ended up defending the moon landing. :) I don't necessarily disbelieve it, I just find the idea that it didn't happen, and the arguments and 'evidence' against it (including these no track pictures), quite interesting.

I don't necessarily believe they lifted the rover either, I just put that forward as a possibility.

The laser reflectors they left behind are still being used today.
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news...004/21jul_llr/

50

Annoying little facts....

The laser reflectors could have been left by unmanned missions.

I can't even imagine more ways that you'd be wrong.

the only thing i have to say about the moon missions is that they definitely filmed some of it in arizona.
i suspect that a lot of the footage was damaged from outside the safety of the pod. So they filmed what hey needed to...no conspiracy needed...they just didnt want to be embarrassed that they forgot to protect the camera that was outside with them on their suits.

Please show me the proof. We'll be on every news channel by tonight! Ofcourse you have proof right?

Well then, let's just close the tread, is this your Final answer ? :Graucho

Franck..nobody owes you proof...you want to refute something? go look for your own proof i am wrong.

there is a 2 mile stage in arizona of the moon landing..that is a fact.

i dont feel like looking for it.however ill point you in the direction.
the maker of the camera they used for outside the space capsule mentioned that they never did anything special to the camera equipment....just painted it grey.
So when they were outside filming, they lost that footage...no conspiracy here...just a small over sight.

Damn, that's a lot of words for saying "as usual i'm full of shit, as usual i don't have any proof whatsoever".

You have been a dumbass conspiracy theorist for many years now. You've claimed the most crazy stuff and never ever shown any proof. You're so fucking pathetic.

You and all those othet conspiracy imbeciles are all the same. Making absurd claims 24/7 because everyone needs to "wake up" but when asked for proof they will always give you shit. They don't feel the need to show any proof. Find it yourself.
You really don't see how fucking dumb that looks to normal people.
How old are you now?

franck..i know you are not normal people...so i am not overly worried.

go fuck your hat

you are a crazy fuck...i love fucking with you

Oh and ofcourse the gool ol "i don't have to show you any proof. Instead you prove to me my claims are wrong".

Typical conspiracy theorist and also religious behaviour.
You know the already lost the argument when they pull that one.

Fucking idiot.

:thumbsup
thanks man

btw...they did film something in arizona...are you suggesting they built a 2 mile stage for no reason?

missed you franck

What kind of fucking argument is that? God, you people are dumb.

i dont argue with you franck

:)

:1orglaugh

Funny that one could be so confident in such a thing, yet there isn't anything easily found online other than other conspiracy idiots insisting its true.

Also convenient that you can make outlandish claims and then demand its on others to prove you wrong. Very Paul Markham like.

Yup, conspiracy nutters love to use that one.

look, no profile, second weight and footprint.

And? It should be easy, right? Unless you don't have the first clue about the subject, and just like endlessly whining for attention, like a tiresome needy kid.

Perhaps it's not true, but the idea that if something isn't easily found online then it must not exist is pretty stupid, frankly. Are you saying you don't believe NASA built moon landing sets on Earth?

Fuck the moon landing. I want to know how they get the caramel in to the chocolate.

http://momisalwayswrite.files.wordpr...03/cadbury.jpg

I'm saying that when someone randomly proclaims that the moon is made of unicorn tears and that its an established fact, that maybe some supporting evidence could be provided rather than leaving it to sane people to do homework. That's how science works. You don't get to make random proclaimations. You draw conclusions based on the evidence and you present your work for scrutiny.

If the moon landings were filmed in a studio, how come there are no tracks?

i think you should spend more time being mad about what i say for fun on here
and less time working.

enjoy
i used to do it full time...im bored as fuck in china right now.
i put moon landing conspiracy into google and spout off whatever the first site says.

then...let franck go to work.


dont get caught up in the sideshow dude.

however...i do stand by my proclamation...they filmed some stuff on earth...because it is just easier....not all the film shot up on the moon was good enough to release.
btw...since this isnt an actual science forum...i am free to say such things without proof.

the board is called gofuckyourself..lol

i win...now im going to sleep:)

the only logical refute i have seen so far

christ dont give the others any help..or this place wont be any fun at all

The set designers didn't think of it.

Besides that I have seen arguments that it takes moister to create tracks, so there should not be any well formed tracks.

Watch the video posted the above and you will not have faith in the official story.

I think Franck actually put me on ignore a while back, for a post (about a giant eyeball) that was quite obviously not serious.

That's possible, but the pictures and video are really the only evidence man was on the moon. Everything else could possibly (I don't know everything they did) have been done with unmanned missions.

I don't think its out of the realm of possibility for that to be true for at least the first mission. but its still pretty thin on evidence though.

Funny thing is conspiracy "nuts" are willing to look at evidence and consider the possibilty there might be another explanation. People who prefer to be told what to think usually flat out refuse to even entertain the possibility they might be being lied to. Even by people (the authorities) who are proven liars.

HA exactly, I was reading waiting for that by someone. I thought the car weighed very little on the moon and even bounced some. There would be more tracks on stage then on the moon then

no.. you don't get credibility by saying: "go watch this random home made video from the internet." That isn't evidence, that isn't a sound argument and that's not how adults come to conclusions.

The only thing I don't have faith in is the future of society if people like yourself continue to confuse mindless drivel such as this as evidence for anything.