Did Man Really Land on the Moon? Let's put this debate to rest.

Tombstone · Post by **Tombstone** » Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:38 am

After hundreds of hours of scouring through vast quantities of photographic evidence, I have selected *the best photo evidence from each camp.

You view. You decide. I am just laying out the evidence.

zinkyusa · Post by **zinkyusa** » Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:41 am

There is no debate, you can see some of the landing sites with a good telescope.

CheshireCat · Post by **CheshireCat** » Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:44 am

It's amazing what they can do with photoshop. :rolleyes:

zinkyusa · Post by **zinkyusa** » Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:45 am

CheshireCat wrote: It's amazing what they can do with photoshop. :rolleyes:

C2!!!:mad: spank, spank

CheshireCat · Post by **CheshireCat** » Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:48 am

zinkyusa wrote: C2!!!:mad: spank, spank

Ouchy Zinky! Not the hairbrush!

Sorry.:-6

zinkyusa · Post by **zinkyusa** » Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:54 am

CheshireCat wrote: Ouchy Zinky! Not the hairbrush!

Sorry.:-6

:-4

chrisb84uk · Post by **chrisb84uk** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 2:42 am

Hehehe and that evidence was supposed to be the best of the bunch and have took hundreds of hours to find, crikey someone must have a lot of free time on there hands hehehe. Mind you those stars do look pretty!!

Casey Morgan · Post by **Casey Morgan** » Fri Sep 01, 2006 9:54 am

It's simple folks. This is the agency that can't analyze the vast majority of the data its collected about space because it doesn't have the right equipment anymore. (Talk about your high tech version of "the dog ate my homework".) Can they really have been behind a conspiracy this long?

Seriously, does anybody have the numbers? It seems to me that 90% of the data they've collected is... I guess unreadable would be the word.