Izzy Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 Capricorn One was a great movie to be fair to conspiracy theories... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 42 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said: I remember people discussing rumours and conspiracies about Hitler escaping to South America - and still being alive - when I was at school in the 70s. He could still have been alive as an old man in his eighties, in theory. It hadn't even crossed my mind until I watched a documentary on it, it's unlikely, but not impossible given how many of them did manage to slip over there. Plus there were certain governments in that part of the World that would have allowed for them to do it. I wonder if anything will ever come out the national archives to see if we saw it as a possibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 I'm pretty sure the Russians admitted in the 90s that they found Hitlers body, part cremated, in his bunker at the time and still have parts of his skeleton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 3 minutes ago, Webbo said: I'm pretty sure the Russians admitted in the 90s that they found Hitlers body, part cremated, in his bunker at the time and still have parts of his skeleton. Believing anything the Russians say is a big faux pas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alf Bentley Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 4 minutes ago, MattP said: It hadn't even crossed my mind until I watched a documentary on it, it's unlikely, but not impossible given how many of them did manage to slip over there. Plus there were certain governments in that part of the World that would have allowed for them to do it. I wonder if anything will ever come out the national archives to see if we saw it as a possibility. I suppose such domestic/foreign archive sources are the most likely source of any information. It seems that the Red Army claim to have identified his jawbone from dental records, but God knows how reliable that info is, and the (alleged) remains seem to have been well and truly destroyed by the KGB in 1970: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler#Defeat_and_death In the unlikely event that he did escape and his death was staged, I don't suppose it would have been in anybody's interests for this to become known (apart from neo-Nazis later on). Intelligence investigations in the UK, other western nations or South America might be the only potential sources, as I don't suppose anything from Germany or Russia could be relied on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Countryfox Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 Just now, Alf Bentley said: I suppose such domestic/foreign archive sources are the most likely source of any information. It seems that the Red Army claim to have identified his jawbone from dental records, but God knows how reliable that info is, and the (alleged) remains seem to have been well and truly destroyed by the KGB in 1970: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler#Defeat_and_death In the unlikely event that he did escape and his death was staged, I don't suppose it would have been in anybody's interests for this to become known (apart from neo-Nazis later on). Intelligence investigations in the UK, other western nations or South America might be the only potential sources, as I don't suppose anything from Germany or Russia could be relied on. I've told you ! ... he's a bloody waiter (with attitude) in Peru !! ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alf Bentley Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 Just now, Countryfox said: I've told you ! ... he's a bloody waiter (with attitude) in Peru !! ..... Bloody restrictive pension arrangements in Peru, then, making a poor old bloke of 127 work as a waiter! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 CNN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alf Bentley Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 8 minutes ago, Webbo said: CNN Yep, that supports the info in Wikipedia. Probably true, but who knows? I suppose there'd only be intelligence data investigating alternatives, such as his post-war presence in South America, if intelligence people from other countries disbelieved the Soviet story and/or got at least half-credible reports that he'd been located elsewhere. As usual (but not always), the boring non-conspiracy is probably the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alf Bentley Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 As an afterthought: It's quite weird to think that 2 of my grandparents, both of whom I met, were older than Hitler. My paternal Grandma was born the year before Hitler and lived until I was 14. My paternal Grandpa was born 8 years before Hitler and I met him when I was 5. According to my research, he also almost certainly sailed to New York with Capt. Edward J. Smith in 1904, 8 years before Smith sailed the Titanic into an iceberg.....strange thing, time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Boos Up Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 1 hour ago, casablancas said: A movie regarding the 'moon landing' worth watching is operation avelanche. It's not a documentary and not credible but worth a watch and does make you think. And to this day I still believe we never landed on the moon. It is feasible that outside of the earths magnetic field the suns radiation would kill you in a thin tin can NASAs pictures show no stars wrong shadows multiple light sources flying flags doctored cross line photos the same background hills in different locations logos on rocks. Is it really hard to believe that a government has lied to you to become popular or to show a technological advantage during a cold war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beliall Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 there are actually people out there who think the world is flat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Countryfox Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 1 minute ago, Beliall said: there are actually people out there who think the world is flat. You're not telling me it isn't !!!!! ..... Oh come on ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Boos Up Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 24 minutes ago, Beliall said: there are actually people out there who think the world is flat. and maybe 5 billion who think it was created by a supreme being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest seanfox778 Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 40 minutes ago, Great Boos Up said: And to this day I still believe we never landed on the moon. It is feasible that outside of the earths magnetic field the suns radiation would kill you in a thin tin can NASAs pictures show no stars wrong shadows multiple light sources flying flags doctored cross line photos the same background hills in different locations logos on rocks. Is it really hard to believe that a government has lied to you to become popular or to show a technological advantage during a cold war. I heard that there's no true pictures of the earth either. They created one in the early 70s and have altered it with CGI over the years. Even if you google pictures of earth they all look digitalised. Why doesn't an astronaut take a picture on their phones or a camera whilst they're in space? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alf Bentley Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 11 minutes ago, Great Boos Up said: and maybe 5 billion who think it was created by a supreme being. Biggest conspiracy theory of them all....we have a winner! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest seanfox778 Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 On the Hitler in South America subject, some say that a lot of nazi scientists carried on with their futuristic experiments in Antarctica which is most accessible from Argentina I think. It's weird how the only peace treaty that's never been broken is the one about how no one is allowed to go to Antarctica, except research scientists. If really rich people do insist they can charter a plane but they're only allowed to go to one bit which could just be for show. The nazis could all be living it up in Antarctica planning their next move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Boos Up Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 12 minutes ago, seanfox778 said: I heard that there's no true pictures of the earth either. They created one in the early 70s and have altered it with CGI over the years. Even if you google pictures of earth they all look digitalised. Why doesn't an astronaut take a picture on their phones or a camera whilst they're in space? They do and they all have stars. The moon landings show no stars. I think they put stars in the pictures randomly but then realised stars have fixed positions so deleted them all as someone could always tell that they were random and fake. No computer power back then had the capability to generate position and brightness of millions of stars in their exact location. Your smartphone has 10x more datapower than any Apollo mission Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beliall Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 1 minute ago, Great Boos Up said: They do and they all have stars. The moon landings show no stars. I think they put stars in the pictures randomly but then realised stars have fixed positions so deleted them all as someone could always tell that they were random and fake. No computer power back then had the capability to generate position and brightness of millions of stars in their exact location. Your smartphone has 10x more datapower than any Apollo mission you're telling me nasa scientists didnt realise stars had fixed positions until after "doctoring" a photo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest seanfox778 Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 1 minute ago, Great Boos Up said: They do and they all have stars. The moon landings show no stars. I think they put stars in the pictures randomly but then realised stars have fixed positions so deleted them all as someone could always tell that they were random and fake. No computer power back then had the capability to generate position and brightness of millions of stars in their exact location. Your smartphone has 10x more datapower than any Apollo mission That's mental! My phone won't even fly me to Tenerife when I switch it to flight mode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacedX Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 4 minutes ago, Great Boos Up said: And to this day I still believe we never landed on the moon. It is feasible that outside of the earths magnetic field the suns radiation would kill you in a thin tin can NASAs pictures show no stars wrong shadows multiple light sources flying flags doctored cross line photos the same background hills in different locations logos on rocks. Is it really hard to believe that a government has lied to you to become popular or to show a technological advantage during a cold war. Respectfully - all the issues that you have raised have been and can be routinely debunked through the application of objective science. They also originate from scientifically illiterate opportunists such as Kaysing, Rene, Sibrel and the cringeworthy Jarrah White encapsulated in the woeful Fox documentary "Did We Land on the Moon?" Conspiracy theories are a business. All the aforementioned made money out of this nonsense and in the case of Sibrel and White, continue to do so and need to continually manufacture doubt. The post modernist paradigm in the damaging concept of the primacy of subjective truth and consequently we inhabit an age in which truth is whatever you want it to be and you can selectively reinforce your preconceptions at the click of a mouse. As Kierkegaard opined over 160 years ago – for many, passionate attachment to palpable falsehood is deemed preferable to detached conviction of the obvious truth. Personally I favour an equally fervent devotion to the empirical over the anecdotal and place my faith in the scientific method. It is indeed feasible that the suns radiation could be fatal outside of the protection of the earths magnetic field, but only chiefly in the event of a coronal mass ejection. The 'thin tin can' you refer to was perfectly adequate for shielding against particles which is very different to shielding against rays. To suggest that the Apollo craft did not provide adequate shielding is to be wholly ignorant of the core construction of the command module and the principles of radiation shielding. I can go into much greater detail if you wish. There are plenty of pictures taken from Apollo depicting stars - however those taken on the surface of the moon during the lunar day do not due to the exposures, small aperture used and the albedo of the surface. Go our into a brightly lit car park on a clear night, focus upon and take a photo of a subject and then see if you have captured any stars overhead. You appear to expect to see stars in the photo's simply because the sky is black. The allegations of 'wrong shadows' is pure nonsense and the same apparent anomalies can be found or duplicated on a sunny day on earth in the case of differing terrain and contour. The multiple light sources? Are you familiar with fall off and vanishing points? - Good discussion found here. http://apollohoax.proboards.com/thread/3245/multiple-lighting-sources-debunked Watch again - the flag doesn't move in any of the videos - only when touched by the astronauts and then the lack of friction and atmosphere in addition to the 1/6th gravity stopped it from settling quickly as it would on earth. It also had a wire stitched into the top to extend it. The supposed 'doctored' cross line photos is simply a consequence of over exposure on brighter or white areas of photos in which the lens flare has burnt out the chemicals. The same background hills are in different locations? - This is perhaps the most comical. Only if you want them to be. The frame of reference on the moon is, if yo pardon the pun, completely alien to that which you are accustomed to on the earth. The supposed logos on rocks have all been examined - including the so called 'c' rock. In the case of the latter the 'c' does not appear on the original negatives or prints and is likely that a hair or a fibre has contaminated a subsequent print. "Is it really hard to believe that a government has lied to you to become popular or to show a technological advantage during a cold war." No, but fabrication of the moon landings would have required the complicity of tens of thousands of employees, contractors and affiliates including coopting and silencing entire fields and disciplines of science - not to mention fooling the surveillance and tracking of several nations of the world including the USSR, by a government that couldn't hush up a hotel break in or a presidential blowjob. No offence, but you seem to have uncritically parroted the entire contents of the Fox TV special which is now batted around the vacuous echo chamber of YouTube and social media by the gullible and scientifically illiterate. The sort of people that sanctimoniously brand themselves 'truthers' and 'awakened' - when challenged by an opposing view start hysterically bleating about 'sheeple' or when presented with demonstrable known science immediately accuse you of being a 'government shill'. May I suggest that you approach the following link with an open mind because true critical thinking involves challenging our preconceptions instead of reinforcing them. http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Boos Up Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 Respectfully can I read your copy and paste tomorrow, I'm tired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacedX Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 1 minute ago, Great Boos Up said: Respectfully can I read your copy and paste tomorrow, I'm tired. Then retire to 'your own bubble'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 1 hour ago, seanfox778 said: On the Hitler in South America subject, some say that a lot of nazi scientists carried on with their futuristic experiments in Antarctica which is most accessible from Argentina I think. It's weird how the only peace treaty that's never been broken is the one about how no one is allowed to go to Antarctica, except research scientists. If really rich people do insist they can charter a plane but they're only allowed to go to one bit which could just be for show. The nazis could all be living it up in Antarctica planning their next move. A chilling theory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 19 January 2017 Share Posted 19 January 2017 51 minutes ago, Line-X said: Respectfully - all the issues that you have raised have been and can be routinely debunked through the application of objective science. They also originate from scientifically illiterate opportunists such as Kaysing, Rene, Sibrel and the cringeworthy Jarrah White encapsulated in the woeful Fox documentary "Did We Land on the Moon?" Conspiracy theories are a business. All the aforementioned made money out of this nonsense and in the case of Sibrel and White, continue to do so and need to continually manufacture doubt. The post modernist paradigm in the damaging concept of the primacy of subjective truth and consequently we inhabit an age in which truth is whatever you want it to be and you can selectively reinforce your preconceptions at the click of a mouse. As Kierkegaard opined over 160 years ago – for many, passionate attachment to palpable falsehood is deemed preferable to detached conviction of the obvious truth. Personally I favour an equally fervent devotion to the empirical over the anecdotal and place my faith in the scientific method. It is indeed feasible that the suns radiation could be fatal outside of the protection of the earths magnetic field, but only chiefly in the event of a coronal mass ejection. The 'thin tin can' you refer to was perfectly adequate for shielding against particles which is very different to shielding against rays. To suggest that the Apollo craft did not provide adequate shielding is to be wholly ignorant of the core construction of the command module and the principles of radiation shielding. I can go into much greater detail if you wish. There are plenty of pictures taken from Apollo depicting stars - however those taken on the surface of the moon during the lunar day do not due to the exposures, small aperture used and the albedo of the surface. Go our into a brightly lit car park on a clear night, focus upon and take a photo of a subject and then see if you have captured any stars overhead. You appear to expect to see stars in the photo's simply because the sky is black. The allegations of 'wrong shadows' is pure nonsense and the same apparent anomalies can be found or duplicated on a sunny day on earth in the case of differing terrain and contour. The multiple light sources? Are you familiar with fall off and vanishing points? - Good discussion found here. http://apollohoax.proboards.com/thread/3245/multiple-lighting-sources-debunked Watch again - the flag doesn't move in any of the videos - only when touched by the astronauts and then the lack of friction and atmosphere in addition to the 1/6th gravity stopped it from settling quickly as it would on earth. It also had a wire stitched into the top to extend it. The supposed 'doctored' cross line photos is simply a consequence of over exposure on brighter or white areas of photos in which the lens flare has burnt out the chemicals. The same background hills are in different locations? - This is perhaps the most comical. Only if you want them to be. The frame of reference on the moon is, if yo pardon the pun, completely alien to that which you are accustomed to on the earth. The supposed logos on rocks have all been examined - including the so called 'c' rock. In the case of the latter the 'c' does not appear on the original negatives or prints and is likely that a hair or a fibre has contaminated a subsequent print. "Is it really hard to believe that a government has lied to you to become popular or to show a technological advantage during a cold war." No, but fabrication of the moon landings would have required the complicity of tens of thousands of employees, contractors and affiliates including coopting and silencing entire fields and disciplines of science - not to mention fooling the surveillance and tracking of several nations of the world including the USSR, by a government that couldn't hush up a hotel break in or a presidential blowjob. No offence, but you seem to have uncritically parroted the entire contents of the Fox TV special which is now batted around the vacuous echo chamber of YouTube and social media by the gullible and scientifically illiterate. The sort of people that sanctimoniously brand themselves 'truthers' and 'awakened' - when challenged by an opposing view start hysterically bleating about 'sheeple' or when presented with demonstrable known science immediately accuse you of being a 'government shill'. May I suggest that you approach the following link with an open mind because true critical thinking involves challenging our preconceptions instead of reinforcing them. http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html Nah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.