essengeebee mowi:

Mar 31, 2012 - lol, they have that (show the comment) option on replies now so my original comment is void.

ProphetOfTheTeapot mowi:

Mar 31, 2012 - Agreed, however my comment still has the advantage of being able to slightly confuse any reader because everyone will be replying to you on a completely unrelated subject, and when they ask why I'll say, "Find my previous comment". Unless they use the old Ctrl-f trick, they'll probably make some kind of "My food supplies are running low" joke, which will really piss me off, and then we can all rally together to do something like what we did to you, on him, and so the Circle of Life continues.

mmmhhm mowi:

Apr 5, 2012 - I love their American accents.

MrRevertis mowi:

Apr 6, 2012 - Only 9 dislikes? Either this isn't really youtube or the countless youtube moon landing nuts didn't understand this is supposed to be funny.

Cosmored mowi:

Apr 7, 2012 - The anomalies in the footage show that they faked it. The reason they had to fake it was probably space radiaion. There's some info on that in this link. spurstalk (dot) com/forums/showthread (dot) php?t=144487 If it hadn't been for space radiation, they probably could have really gone to the moon.

AsinineComment mowi:

Apr 9, 2012 - Ahhh, "space radiaion" (sic). Is that the technical term for 'stuff', is it? Boy, you sure are the go-to person for considered, investigative analysis of scientific records n other stuff, eh! (head slap, sigh....)

Nertrender mowi:

Apr 9, 2012 - I would like someone to show me one anomalies that supports that it wasn't on the moon. all I ever see are the things that would be difficult if it was on earth (like the flag continuing to vibrate as if there were no gravity).

marekgreen mowi:

Apr 12, 2012 - Couple of months back a Canadian private company to a detail footage of the whole surface of the moon - you can see there most of the landing sites. So do shut up you conspiracy loving nerds.

Lampsmahari mowi:

Apr 14, 2012 - Conspiracy nuts a so stupid

WiseOldBill mowi:

Apr 18, 2012 - considering they give rise to sketches like this so let them be stupid conspiracy nuts

Lampsmahari mowi:

Apr 20, 2012 - Haha, your right, more nuts!!!

XXLpeanuts mowi:

Apr 21, 2012 - fail.

Henchmann21 mowi:

Apr 24, 2012 - would that be the Van Allen belt that all you conspiracy nuts throw up as proof that it was fake. But you nuts always fail to mention that the guy who discovered the van Allen radiation belt who should know more than the so called arm chair experts screaming hoax & fakes says the radiation belt would be no problem. So who to believe nut jobs who scream word radiation as if it all fatal without knowing about different kinds of radiation or the guy who discovered the belts & does know. Toughy!

Cosmored mowi:

Apr 24, 2012 - Van Allen started working for NASA and changed his position. This article explains it. buzzcreek (dot) com/grade-a/MOON/articles1 (dot) htm

Henchmann21 mowi:

Apr 24, 2012 - LOL oh dear is that article suppose to convince people. It does the classic thing of trying to cast doubt in the reader mind whilst trying to sound reasonable and valid. Unfortunately it doesn't quite make it, mainly because a lot of it is speculation mixed with very little solid facts past quoting old research. Also NASA employing van allen when trying to get to the moon is hardly surprising, people would be more shocked if they had not.

Cosmored mowi:

Apr 25, 2012 - There are some anomalies that are simply too clear to obfuscate such as this. /watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y (do a YouTube search on "Apollo 15 flag waving") This one's pretty clear too. /watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00

Henchmann21 mowi:

Apr 25, 2012 - The Apollo flag has been debunked and explained plenty of times before. Why can't you guys wrap your heads around that in a vacuum and low gravity, that any kinetic energy transferred to the flag means it will continue to move for longer than if it was in earth gravity and atmosphere. So giving the impression of waving.

Cosmored mowi:

Apr 26, 2012 - "that any kinetic energy transferred to the flag means it will continue to move for longer than if it was in earth gravity and atmosphere." This is a very vague statement. How is the energy transfered to the flag in your scenario? The theory is that the footage was shown in slow-motion which explains the speed of the waving and the length of time it waves. /watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y (do a YouTube search on "Apollo 15 flag waving")

benjo265 mowi:

Apr 27, 2012 - The people arguing about the moon landing. It's a comedy sketch. Shut the fuck up.

taxidude mowi:

Apr 28, 2012 - I think there's an autism attack in here. Mitchell and Webb do comedy sketches. This is not the History Chanel.

swhelan25 mowi:

May 2, 2012 - where do you come up with something like that? not saying i don't believe you, but my question is valid.

Erech01 mowi:

May 2, 2012 - Its a joke. I'm not being serious:P I got the idea from a red bull advert.

ironclaw92 mowi:

May 3, 2012 - hilarious! this perfectly demonstrates the mentality of the moon hoax conspiracy idiots.

lazaru2000 mowi:

May 10, 2012 - Ah this is yesterday's news. The sexy new conspiracy theory is THE MOON IS A HOLOGRAM!! Why? BECAUSE IS APPEARS TO WOBBLE IF YOU STARE AT IT!! This is what happens when idiots have too much spare time. I say, bring back National Service and heavy manual labour. That'll shut em up!