Moon landing was faked, the WTC was destroyed by the U.S( pentagon) ?
543801
Lunar Landing is fake. People have proven that the photos are totally fake by identifying the lengths of the shadows and angles of the shadows as studio lighting.\n\nJust imagine, in the midst of the cold war, USA had to do something to show that they were still NO.1 in the space race all whilst the Soviet Union had already sent a man to orbit.\n\nAs for the WTC. That was totally a wet work by zionist groups.  Come on, there's enough evidence out there and if you still believe that the WTC was done by some Islamic terrorits, you gotta be blind, drugged, or really outta your mind.  \n\nRecent stunts by CIA (criminals in action) is the color revolution in former CIS nations.  Look that up if you don't know what I am talking about.  Velvet, Orange, Tulip Revolution.
348183
I don't believe the official version of the 9/11.\nIf it was true why the government don't show us the videos of the plane crash at the Pentagon, Why the remains of the WTC were quickly destroyed, how can WTC 7 collapse with a small fire? Why the government and the EPA lied about the air quality surrounding the WTC after the collapse and putting the lives of hundreds if not thousands of men and women who were helping the recoveries in danger (most of them have health illness related to poor air quality these days)? Why the government can't give us the proper answers to these question. \nWhy can't we believe the government ? They lied for the war in Iraq, where's the WMD ? but at least we have remove the dictator.\n\nHere is one evidence of the collapse of the buildings were "pulled intentionally"\nA presentation made by professor Steven E. Jones.\nhttp://www.cerebellum.tv/fvideo/byu.php...\nThe power point slides\nhttp://www.checktheevidence.com/911/byus...\n\nEven in the 1960s the government were willing to create "terrorism" in order to attack cuba\nhttp://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf
1018999
No official report corroborates your claims.  You're really embarrassing yourself.  The use of profanity only shows you lack understanding, intelligence, and logic skills.  That is why you let a novice fiction filmmaker spoon-feed you information contradicting everything you saw on that day.  I am sorry for you.\n\nThe terrorists on flight 77 did not need to take off nor land the plane.  The take-off part had been done for them.  They never planned to land.  So what does it matter if they had trouble with landings?\n\nImpossible turns?  Could it be that the terrorists didn't know what they were doing?  I doubt they planned to make those insane maneuvers.  The first attempt at the pentagon was botched, so they had no choice.  They were planning to die anyway, why wouldn't they attempt an "impossible" maneuver?\n\nLight poles at the pentagon were knocked from their break-away bases (new safety design), unlike the poles the filmmaker references in another accident.  Oh, and ripped out of the ground is not damaged???  The poles did exactly what they were designed to do.\n\nhttp://911myths.com/\nhttp://www.ccdominoes.com/lc/LooseChangeGuide.html\nhttp://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html\nhttp://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/06/05/911_documentary_removed/\nhttp://wtc.nist.gov/\nhttp://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html\n\nNow please shut up.
907270
Give it up!  What new questions?  Airplanes crashed into building!!  People were killed, not just Americans.
531032
Why do morons insist on making something out of absolutely nothing?!  OF COURSE WE LANDED ON THE MOON!  Do you think all those incredible images from space were a hoax as well?!  Ask Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, and all the men who have been on the moon to show you their private photos and to share their recollections!  Must we continue to perpetuate these ignorant and unfounded stories of hoaxes??!!  Take a deep breath, switch to decaf, and join the REAL world!!  ANY of our satellites can pinpoint EXACTLY where each of the remnants of our Apollo landing equipment is, and all the flags and instruments that were left behind!!  For God's sake, people: remove the poles that have long been residing in your rear ends, as well as the remnants of retardation that were left behind in your brains!!!
900326
America did not land on the Moon. We payed billions of dollars for the 360 foot Saturn 5 rocket so we could look at it and say wow that is a big rocket. We kept approx. 400,000 technicians, scientists and construction contractors quiet, with zero leaks to the public. The rocks that we thought that came from moon and have proved to be from the moon are really from the Pacific Ocean. \n\nOther Conspiracies to think about: \n\n1. The Jews did not suffer in Germany because there was no Holocaust. Actually it was the Jews that was torturing the poor blond haired deprived Germans. Those tattoos on the Jews arms and hands that are still alive today (by the grace of God) are really there because they want to be hip. \n\n2. We knew the Japanese were going to bomb Pearl Harbor before they did. I mean come-on President Roosevelt liked the thought of our boys baking inside the Battle Ship Arizona before they died. The President was looking for a better way to get a good nights sleep. \n\n3. 9/11 conspiracy: the number of people it would've taken to pull off the largest mass murder in US history could fill one of the towers. Do you think the present administration is competent enough to pull off the largest scam in history? The Watergate and Enron capers were known by a handful of people and the secrets were leaked. So how did the 9/11 keep thousands of people's lips sealed?\n\n4. The Mafia whacked JFK, via the Russian connection, via the Cuban connection. The man on the grassy knoll was a CIA agent acting on orders from Marcello of New Orleans with complicity of the then Boss of Boss Giancana in Chicago. Ruby whacked Oswald to seal the path to the Mafia, he was a two-bit night club owner in Marcello's outfit...true story.\n\n5. Aliens landed in Roswell and we transported them to Area 51 to back engineer their technology, where do you think the stealth air craft came from? Again, we kept it secret by brain washing the thousands of workers who were in on the scam. \n\n6. The Moon we see every night is really not there along with the planets and stars as well the Planet Killing Asteroids. Those were put there by the evil United States to toy with our minds. \n\n7. Fossils of early homosapiens, homoerectus and earlier models were put their by evil paleontologists, athropoligists, and assorted rock hounds looking to enhance their careers, Creation is the real objective reality. \n\n8. America is a conspiracy and is a fake country and none of us Americans really live here. \n\n9. I was never born so this response to your question is a fake.
1160864
lucky2bealive, I don't want to disagree with you but I don't believe you are going to find anywhere in the historical records that Bin Laden claimed responsibility for the 9/11 bombings. What he has done is praise the matyrs of that event. However, there would be more clarity and the issue can be put to bed finally if the government gave us the names of all the people that died in the various events. Where are the planes that crashed? Do you really believe that a building like the Pentagon would have cameras that are intermittent and take pictures every 7/8 seconds. Come.. Come. We are talking about the most technologically advanced country in the world. Something smells fishy and the stench cannot be dispersed until the Government come clean. Have you ever seen reports of the examination of  the so called crash sites?
154020
Lots of things make people say that. There are pieces of evidence pointing in both directions (yes/no). I'm not sure what to believe, myself. I'm kind of leaning toward no, simply because the claims against the moon landing make sense, and the attempts to refute those claims don't sound very credible.\n\nBut honestly, I don't really care. Maybe we did, maybe we didn't. Unless you went yourself, or helped fake the whole thing, or are given adequate proof, you really can't know for sure.
32339
FACT FACT FACT.\n\nMy physics professor gave the unbeatable argument on this one.  If the USA had lied, the USSR WOULD HAVE SAID SOMETHING.  The USSR was very technologically advanced, and it would have taken very little effort on their part to look up and see if there really was a metal box hurling toward the moon sending high-amplitude radio transmissions back to Houston.  If this hadn't been the case, the USSR would have called our bluff, I guarantee you.\n\nIf they didn't doubt the moon landing, why the hell should we?  Defrauding the American people might have been a comparably easy task, but there's no way they could have fooled the USSR.  The USSR did, after all, have the technology to beat us in the first two stages of the space race (the first satelite and the first human in space).
155532
Yes. Yes, yes, yes.\n\nOf all the things that people have made conspiracy theories out of, this has got to be one of the lamest. The moon landing hoax evidence is really lame.\n\nSo, yes.
1151741
It's questionable. It seems it was hit with some sort of missile. The story is supposedly that an airplane hit it, but the resulting hole is too small and there is no evidence of plane. The government says the explosion was so hot it burned the evidence, but how come the bodies and other things around weren't burned? It's one of the many questionable topics of 9/11 (like how the twin towers free-fell to the earth??) that are explored in the video below.
97561
Apollo was not a hoax, please.  The program gave us some of the technology that you are using right now.  \nYeah, the U.S. government spent millions just to make it look like we went to the moon just to spite the ruskies.  Trust me, they are not creative enough to hatch a scheme like in the movie "Wag the Dog".
1077212
It wasn't faked. I agree, the technology involved was bare bones but still capable. Here are some quotes that help counter some of the conspiracy theories:\n\nIn some photos, the crosshairs appear to be behind objects, rather than in front of them where they should be, as if the photos were altered.\n\n        * In photography, the light white color (the object behind the crosshair) makes the black object (the crosshair) invisible due to saturation effects in the film emulsion. The film particles that ought to have been black were exposed by light from the adjacent brightly lit particles. Ironically, this saturation effect would not happen if the crosshairs were drawn on in post, and so is evidence of genuine photos. Attempting to alter photos that already have crosshairs would make the compositing process far more difficult.\n\nThe quality of the photographs is implausibly high.\n\n        * The astronauts were trained in the use of their gear, and shots and poses were planned in advance as part of the mission. NASA selected only the best photographs for release to the public, and some of the photos were cropped to improve their composition. There are many badly exposed, badly focused and poorly composed images amongst the thousands of photos that were taken by the Apollo Astronauts. Many can be seen at the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal. Photos were taken on high-quality Hasselblad cameras with Zeiss lenses, using 70 mm medium format film.\n\nThere are no stars in any of the photos, and astronauts never report seeing any stars from the capsule windows. \n\n         *Stars are also never seen in Space Shuttle, Mir, International Space Station Earth observation photos, or even sporting events that take place at night. The sun in the Earth/Moon area shines as brightly as on a clear noon day on Earth, so cameras used for imaging these things are set for daylight exposure, with quick shutter speeds in order to prevent overexposing the film. The dim light of the stars simply does not have a chance to expose the film.\n\nhe color and angle of shadows and light are inconsistent.\n\n        * Shadows on the Moon are complicated because there are several light sources: the Sun, the Earth, and the Moon itself. \n\n The Moon's surface during the daytime is so hot that camera film would have melted.\n\n        * There is no atmosphere to efficiently couple lunar surface heat to devices such as cameras not in direct contact with it. In a vacuum, only radiation remains as a heat transfer mechanism. \n\nThe launch rocket produced no visible flame.\n\n        * Hydrazine (a fuel) and dinitrogen tetroxide (an oxidizer) were the Lunar Module propellants, chosen for their reliability; they ignite hypergolically –upon contact– without a spark. Hypergolic propellants happen to produce a nearly transparent exhaust. Hypergolic fuels are also used by several space launchers: the core of the American Titan, the Russian Proton, the European Ariane 1 through 4 and the Chinese Long March, and the transparency of their plumes is apparent in many launch photos.\n\nThe flag placed on the surface by the astronauts flapped despite there being no wind on the Moon.\n\n        * The astronauts were moving the flag into position, causing motion. Since there is no air on the Moon to provide friction, these movements caused a long-lasting undulating movement seen in the flag. There was a rod extending from the top of the flagpole to hold the flag out for proper display. The fabric's rippled appearance was due to its having been folded during flight and gave it an appearance which could be mistaken for motion in a still photograph.\n\nThese are only a few quotes. They all seem much more convincing then the arguments the conspiracy theorists present.
758474
Any one who as seen the photos that were supplied to to the media  through various news outlets has to come to the sober conclusion that it was not a 737 airplane that hit the Pentagon.\n What is disturbing is why did they hold on to these videos for so long? Were their video experts "enhancing" it at the Pentagon all this time?
495153
"Moon Hoax" proponents claim that the Moon landings of Apollo 11 on July 20, 1969 and subsequent missions never happened, but were instead staged and pre-filmed on Earth. The idea grew significantly in popularity after the release of the movie Capricorn One (1978), which portrays a NASA attempt to fake a landing on Mars, implausibly using a Lunar Module, designed to land on the airless Moon, on a planet with an atmosphere.\n\nIt is possible that a brief sequence in the James Bond movie Diamonds Are Forever (1971) which appears to show a Moon landing being simulated, may coincide with some of the first suggestions of the landings being faked. British playwright Desmond Lowden wrote a play called The News-Benders in 1967 in which all major technological advances since 1945 were shown to have been simulated; the play was televised in January 1968 and showed a Moon landing faked with models.\n\nThe now-defunct Flat Earth Society lodged one of the earliest complaints about the veracity of the Apollo missions (Schadewald 1980) (also see the external link to the Flat Earth Society). They claimed the various "earthrise" photos from Apollo 8, with the Moon in the foreground and the Earth in the background, were fakes. The primary basis of their claim was that it did not square with their belief that the Earth is flat (Newsweek 1969).\n\nIn his book A Man on the Moon, Andrew Chaikin mentions that at the time of Apollo 8's lunar orbit mission in December 1968, such conspiratorial stories were in circulation as rumoured facts. The first published attempt to establish such claims as factual was Bill Kaysing's self-published book We Never Went to the Moon in 1974 (Plait 2002:157), although perhaps the best known is NASA Mooned America by Ralph Rene.\n\nHoax skeptics claim that the Moon landing hoax accusations are conspiracy theories — claims that conspirators in the possession of secret knowledge are misleading the public in pursuit of a hidden agenda. In the Moon Hoax's case the hidden agenda is the United States of America's eagerness to land on the moon before their space race rivals, the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (U.S.S.R.), who had beaten them into orbit by launching Yuri Gagarin into space in 1961, and achieved several other "firsts" in space exploration.\n\nTo know more about Issues and controversies please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_moon_landing_hoax_accusations
238713
Men landed on moon during the times of space age race between Russia and USA. If it were a fraud, Russia would have been on top of it to bring it up. So, I guess it was confirmed that man really did land on moon and got rock samples back to earth. So i think it really happened. It can't be fraud. Ofcourse there is this talk about pictures taken by astronauts in moon that looks fake and all...but there are equally positive proofs of video and pictures taken on moon too. If you ask me, i think it is real.
616775
I have seen several of the conspiracy theory films and they do make me think.\n\nThey insist that the WTC buildings one and two had to have explosive charges placed in them like a controlled demo for them to come down as fast as they did.\n\nThey show, and you can see, puffs of smoke coming out of windows floors below the floors collapsing.  Is this really PROOF that there were explosive charges.  You do not see any flashes with the puffs of smoke.\n\nThey show other tall building fires where they fires lasted longer and the buildings did not collapse.  But in the WTC collapses there were gigantic planes that hit and did a lot of structural damage.  There was also jet fuel that created the fires.  There was a tremendous amount of weight suspended above where the planes hit.  I remember thinking that it was amazing that the buildings did not fall down.  Of course, later they did.\n\nA few years ago (before 9/11/01) there was a 10 floor building being built in Bridgeport CT. There was a construction accident on one of the upper floors and the weight of what fell just massively overwhelmed the support below.  The whole building fell to the ground just like a controlled demo, just like the WTC towers.  There was no bomb, no plane hitting the building, no fire.\n\nI think that there was a lot of damage on the floors where the planes hit.  All it would take would be for one floor to fail and everything above it drops and hits the floor below.  Imagime how much weight that is.  It only gets heavier as it goes.\n\nStill, how the planes and bodies at the Pentagon and in PA completely vaporized makes you wonder.  One film says that flight 93 went to Cleveland and all the passangers were taken off the plane and that even the cell phone calls were fakes.  They do not say what happened to the real passangers after.  Were they all shot?\n\nA lot of the conspiricy theories have as many holes as the supposed cover ups.  Their idea of proof is often pretty lame.