One of the pieces of evidence for an actual landing is the mirrors that scientists and hobbiests use to measure the moon's distance with a laser.

If anyone who subscribes to one hoax theory or another has as explanation for these mirrors on the lunar surface, I'd love to hear it (I'm not saying that in a sarcastic way, I'm actually wondering).

No problem, here's a link

On the pro-hoax side, here's a really suspicious post-landing interview with the astronauts where they act embarrassed instead of heroic. Obviously not evidence of any hoax theory, but very suspicious anyways.

Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_experiment?wprov=sfla1

^{HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 110880}

Good bot :)

New around these parts? Try searching Kubrick moon landing. Enjoy.

Stanley was the definition of an Intriguing Character.

Mirrors were put there without a manned mission though. And drones have been claimed to be landed on Mars. So that's not really proof of anything besides a mirror being on the Moon.

Yea, I don't know why people use this as evidence for the manned Apollo missions when it's obvious drones can do it just as easily.

Oh for fucks sake. Not "the mirrors on the moon" again. Every fucking time.

Want to explain the flaw in my idea? I'm sure there is one.

"hobbiests measure the moon's distance with a laser?"

The earth rotates at 1000 mph. the moon orbits the earth at 2200 mph. The moon is 240,000 miles from the earth.

Now, explain to me how a hobbiest, or anyone, could focus a laser on a 2 foot wide target on the surface of the moon.

If there are mirrors on the surface of the moon, they could've been placed there remotely.

Exactly what I was thinking. Thanks for saying it for me so I don't have to endure the downvotes

Rumor is they faked the landings to cover up the fact they actually went there.

And now its fake fake faking the real

If you look at any narrative in history it's fake faking the real also known as:

winners write the history books

or in the media

spin or

fake it until you make it or

giving the people what they want - (a story).

The conspiracy followers biggest heel is expecting there to be an easily digestible narrative in the bottom of the rabbit hole. There is, but the very way one thinks needs to be modified to see it.

somewhat agreed- the digestible narrative on an ostensibly discrete event is like looking for a trick shot on a pool table or bad black jack deck when the game being played is actually Go.

the other piece is that organizations get attached to historical narratives for so many different reasons, one of which being that is literally an effort to rework an explanation than just plop something into the preexisting one.

I don't believe people do so much proactive conspiring as reactive fitting. That said, something like Jekyll Island is a good example of straight up conspiracy.

So, indigestible is good way to put it.

http://humansarefree.com/2011/02/truth-about-moon.html

If we did go, the footage they released was definitely bunk. I mean WTF. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxppG-rNHxs

The astronauts are brave AF, because we may have been teleporting to the moon since before they even landed, but they have to go via traditional dangerous means--even if they went up to orbit, they are still grave. Kubrick being discussed to film moon footage is not a conspiracy, that happened. The moon studios were set up.

Also, Neil Armstrong makes a case for it never happening because of his actions. Here's a guy who should be the hero of the world. Wherever he goes. But he becomes a hermit, staying out of the limelight entirely.

I think he might be referring to remote viewing of the moon at Stanford with Ingo Swan

ultimately it's not about the hoax. it's about how, if you've been taught something your whole life, how can you go against it and discover truth? The answer is to be fearless. Yesterday was 9/11, and boy did i happen to casually mention to a friend that the media indoctrinates us from birth with their version of truth. He disagreed. I mentioned wtc7. He had never heard of it. He then told me that to be associated as a conspiracy theorist is one of the worst things a person can be. It disgusted him. I showed him building 7 videos, but he got angrier and angrier about how conspiracy theorists are just the worse kind of fucking losers. Bart Sibrel and Moonraker on youtube, in my opinion have unequivocally proven the moon landing to be faked. And yet, people hate them, they have been blacklisted, called losers with no life, and the real reason why, is because people can't go against MSM. It hurts their pride too much. Pride = Fear. To become fearless, first we have to be authentic. Each layer of the onion of pride must be peeled back slowly

I remember there being no moon missions after Apollo 13, and last year all of a sudden there's always been 6. And no I didn't shift dimensions. And yes I confirmed it over and over again with a large interest in UFOs and our moon history. And no idk how the fuck it makes sense. It doesn't. And yes, there will be people telling me I'm just mistaken. And no I won't a give a shit.

If we were in a supposed race to the moon with the Russians, how come the Russians never landed on the moon? My brother's wife is from Russia. She said it is well known it was faked over there.

I'm not saying we don't have the technology to go now but in the 1960s? No way.